3 ms·
The legal entity owning the brain should be responsible for that brains output. That is, you should be responsible for the output of your brain and OpenAI for t
by xyzal 3y ago
The legal entity owning the brain should be responsible for that brains output. That is, you should be responsible for the output of your brain and OpenAI for the output of its LLMs.
Seems simple to me.
- logicchains 3y agoWhy shouldn't the entity using the brain be responsible, since they're the one directing it?
- chrisjj 3y agoTell me where the LLM user directed the LLM to slurp (C) works.
- logicchains 3y agoThe NYT prompted it with sections of copyright articles to get it to reproduce the rest of the copyrighted article. Which is pretty clearly deliberately trying to get it to reproduce a copyright article.
- Snow_Falls 3y ago... Which shows that its capable of regurgitating copyrighted material. What does it matter what the method is? People can deliberately use the thing for copyright infringement. Besides, proving that it can be done on purpose is just the easiest method, your really think it won't happen by accident?
- dcow 3y agoIf you prompted me with: "<blank> for a Klondike." and I responded with "What would you do for a Klondike." then I've recreated copyrighted material. Does it make sense to sue me? I've learned the phrase organically, and I may have never seen the original content, only learned it 2nd hand via word of mouth. If I charged you for my time does it matter? Note I fully agree that OpenAI should acquire the appropriate licenses to use all of the content it uses to train its models. However I'm not as clear on whether anybody should be able to place limits on or modulate/attenuate the output once the input has been appropriately licensed and responsibly consumed.
- chrisjj 3y agoSo, nowhere. > Which is pretty clearly deliberately trying to get it to reproduce a copyright article. Not reproduce. Recall.
- chrisjj 3y agoParents: ouch!